In Control, the Core i7-2960XM is slightly slower than the Core i5-9400F. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
Core i7-2960XM
- Consumes up to 15% less energy – 55 vs 65 Watts
- Consumes up to 15% less energy
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Core i5-9400F
- Up to 1% faster in Control – 249 vs 246 FPS
- Up to 1% faster in Control
- Is 7 years and 4 months newer – Jan 08, 2019 vs Sep 04, 2011
- Is 7 years and 4 months newer
Control FPS Calculator
Core i7-2960XM vs Core i5-9400F: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Average FPS
249 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
163 FPS
100%
Price, $
$119.99
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.48/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The Core i7-2960XM vs Core i5-9400F in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The Core i7-2960XM vs Core i5-9400F in core CPU performance specifications
Core i7-2960XM
Sep 4th, 2011
Cores
4-core
67%
L3 Cache
8 MB
89%
Base Frequency
2.7 GHz
93%
Turbo Frequency
3.7 GHz
90%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1600 MHz
60%
Core i5-9400F
Jan 8th, 2019
Cores
6-core
100%
L3 Cache
9 MB
100%
Base Frequency
2.9 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.1 GHz
100%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
Core i7-2960XM Sep 4th, 2011 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Core i5-9400F Jan 8th, 2019 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Sep 4th, 2011 | Released | Jan 8th, 2019 |
| $1,096.00 | MSRP | – |
Laptop | Segment | Desktop |
| LGAG2 (988B) | Socket | LGA1151 |
55 W | Power Consumption | 65 W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1600 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
Intel HD 3000 | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
Overclockable | Overclock Support | Not Overclockable |
